LLM-as-a-Judge is the standard paradigm for NLP evaluation, yet its systemic reliability remains poorly understood despite being widely treated as a deterministic ground truth. We present a comprehensive reliability audit, stress-testing six frontier models across four benchmarks, five prompt formats, two presentation orders, three sampling temperatures, and ten repetitions per condition. Our empirical analysis reveals severe vulnerabilities: verdicts change across identical replications at temperature zero, position-order swaps flip the majority of verdicts on challenging tasks, and the most deterministic judge achieves perfect consistency by trivially repeating incorrect verdicts, agreeing with ground truth only 51% of the time. To formalize these multi-faceted failure modes, we introduce the trustworthy verdict rate (T), a unified metric capturing the joint probability that an evaluation is reproducible, order-invariant, and accurate. Using T , we derive a theoretical upper bound on accuracy imposed by position bias and show that reliability is item-specific rather than model-level. Finally, we demonstrate that shifting from pairwise win-rate to holistic rubric scoring improves trustworthiness more than any single-format prompting intervention, offering an actionable framework for robust NLP evaluation.

Large language models are increasingly adapted to downstream tasks through fine-tuning. Full supervised fine-tuning (SFT) and parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT) methods, such as Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA), are two dominant approaches. While PEFT methods are widely used for their computational efficiency, the implications of their configurations (e.g., rank) remain under-explored in downstream Q&A tasks and generalisation. In this work, we perform a comprehensive evaluation across multiple reasoning and recall datasets, conducting a rank sweep to quantify the trade-off between SFT and PEFT. We also compare the accuracy of PEFT and SFT models across in-domain and out-of-domain adaptation, highlighting distinct generalisation behaviour and task-specific forgetting. We demonstrate that LoRA achieves competitive and in some cases superior performance compared to SFT, particularly on reasoning tasks at specific rank values. Additionally, we analyze the internal representations via spectral features and layer-wise attention structures, offering insights into representational drift and structural changes in attention patterns.